U4 battle it out in the Darbyshire debating final
It's not often that debating risks being rained off, but for a short while on Tuesday afternoon the decision to hold the U4 final of the Darbyshire Debating Competition in the marquee looked rash.
Nonetheless, four teams - from Carr, Crawfurd, Holman and Rosebery - came together to thrash out the thorny issue of whether public art collections should be sold to pay for social care.
All speakers agreed that funding decent levels of social care is a grave challenge for British society, but the debate turned on whether selling art is an effective or justifiable way of footing the bill.
There was some tension along the proposition line as to what would be sold, to whom and for how long, but the proposition argued convincingly that much of the nation's art collections languishes in basements, and that governments should take any steps possible to alleviate suffering.
The opposition's view was that selling art was only a short-term fix, and that the consequences were too socially divisive to be justifiable. In the end, a barnstorming speech by Emily Vandrau (R), taking on the challenging role of opposition whip, secured the victory for Rosebery.
OE Alex Mahony, returning to assist in judging the competition, praised Emily's devastating anatomisation of the flaws in the proposition argument, and her unrelenting focus on the motion. "It was a performance many Sixth Form debaters would have been proud of," he said. "It was absolutely thrilling to watch."
Rosebery win a voucher for £125 to be spent for the good of the whole House. Our thanks go again to Dr John Darbyshire, who so generously supports our competition each year.